Kentmere 400 ISO Experience
Old 07-20-2009   #1
dshfoto
Registered User
 
dshfoto's Avatar
 
dshfoto is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 375
Kentmere 400 ISO Experience

Anyone used Ketmere 400 ISO B&W film, being sold by Freestyle?
Any opinions on how it compares to Tri-X or Neopan 400?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-20-2009   #2
cmdrzed
wallflower
 
cmdrzed is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Memphis TN
Posts: 219
I have been curious about this film as well. Hopefully someone will chime in.
__________________
Leica M6 TTL (2001), 2x Leica M2 (1960 and 1965)
Zeiss ZM 35/2.8 and Canon 50/1.4 LTM
Ricoh GRD3
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2009   #3
-doomed-
film is exciting
 
-doomed-'s Avatar
 
-doomed- is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 800
I also wonder about this film as the price is tempting .
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2009   #4
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,756
Should I add I have noted this film, not being brave enough to jump on?
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2009   #5
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
 
Trius's Avatar
 
Trius is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Rochester, NY & Toronto area
Posts: 8,273
Somebody please buy this film!
__________________
My Gallery Flickr
Fine grain is a bourgeois concept

Happiness is APX100 and Rodinal 1:100

A bunch o cameras. Does it really matter?
And NOW ... Fuji X-Pro1 w/ 18-55, 18/2 & adapted Zuikos and Hexanons
http://zuikoholic.tumblr.com
https://www.instagram.com/e.r.dunbar/
http://weedram.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2009   #6
3 Olives
Registered User
 
3 Olives's Avatar
 
3 Olives is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trius View Post
Somebody please buy this film!
I agree! I doubt you will be disappointed at that price.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2009   #7
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
50 rolls on the way...
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2009   #8
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
 
Ronald_H's Avatar
 
Ronald_H is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Helmond, The Netherlands
Age: 46
Posts: 1,734
If it is cheap why not buy & try it? As good a reason to go out shooting as any!

Recently bought some Fomapan 100. Cheap. Great results!

Back in the day when cassettes were popular, I tried every conceivable brand and type (instead of sticking to Maxell XL-II which was great and consistent). It somehow was more fun. Likewise I could stick to Superia 400 and HP5+, but why not try something different?
__________________
"The only substitute for Tri-X is more Tri-X"

My Flickr

My regular website: www.lookupinwonder.nl
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2009   #9
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
 
ChrisPlatt's Avatar
 
ChrisPlatt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Queens NYC
Age: 56
Posts: 2,480
I too have been waiting for some reviews of this film.
FWIW B&H sells it at an even lower price than Freestyle.

Chris
  Reply With Quote

some kentmere 400 samples
Old 09-12-2009   #10
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
some kentmere 400 samples

leica m6, 28mm avenon
souped in d-76
microtek m1 pro scanner

i'll post more as i go along
Attached Images
File Type: jpg martinboat5L.jpg (27.4 KB, 686 views)
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2009   #11
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
sorry about the size, some more
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Martinboat7Lrff.jpg (119.4 KB, 479 views)
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2009   #12
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
here's a bigger file to peek at

http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=25849&full=1
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-13-2009   #13
Mcary
Registered User
 
Mcary is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Virginia USA
Age: 56
Posts: 1,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by emraphoto View Post
Do you have any HP-5 that you can compare it with? Since Kentmere Photographic and Ilford Photo are both owned by Harman Techology. I wonder how these films compare to each other.
__________________
M. Cary
Trying to see something new whither I'm visiting someplace new or a place that I've been a dozens of times before.
Tumblr http://www.tumblr.com/blog/mcaryartnude
Not work safe

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-13-2009   #14
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
Hi Mike,

I don't have much experience with much of the ilford line-up. Haven't shot much in the way of HP5 so you would have to rely on the input of someone else. I do know that the kentmere is indeed a Harman product though from my reading it apparently is a new recipe.
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2009   #15
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
more of the kentmere folks. souped in d-76.

click on the links for large images.

http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=25864&full=1

http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=25865&full=1

http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=25866&full=1
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2009   #16
Pablito
coco frío
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 3,470
looks like hp5+ grain
at least as far as you can tell from a scan on the internets.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2009   #17
benmacphoto
Registered User
 
benmacphoto's Avatar
 
benmacphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Age: 30
Posts: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablito View Post
looks like hp5+ grain
at least as far as you can tell from a scan on the internets.
I think it is repackaged Hp5, if I'm not mistaken.
__________________
Instagram

Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2009   #18
kxl
Social Documentary
 
kxl's Avatar
 
kxl is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sunny SoCal
Posts: 2,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by benmacphoto View Post
I think it is repackaged Hp5, if I'm not mistaken.
I think you might be mistaken. While Ilford acquired Kentmere about 2 years ago, Simon Galley (a Director at Ilford) has stated categorically that Ilford does NOT rebadge film, even their own. He further stated that Kentmere 100 and 400 are BRAND NEW film.

Besides, a quick check of the massive dev chart shows different dev times for Kentmere 400 and HP5+.
__________________
Keith
My website
RFF feedback


"... I thought the only way to give us an incentive, to bring hope, is to show the pictures of the pristine planet - to see the innocence.” ― Sebastiao Salgado

Last edited by kxl : 09-14-2009 at 22:01.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-14-2009   #19
benmacphoto
Registered User
 
benmacphoto's Avatar
 
benmacphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Age: 30
Posts: 924
Ahhh, I thought it was because of Ilford owning Kentmere.
I do want to try this film out sometime, and its good to hear its brand new film.
__________________
Instagram

Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2009   #20
Seele
Anachronistic modernist
 
Seele is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 300
I am very doubtful of Harman would want to establish new film manufacturing facilities at the Kentmere works, as Kentmere has always been a paper manufacturer. But as Harman owns both Ilford and Kentmere brands there is nothing to stop them from selling Ilford-made films under whatever label they want, as long as they own the label.

Some time ago Ilford had two "second label" films, Pan400 and Pan100, sold in selected markets at lower prices than the HP5 and FP4 equivalences. They were actually the same films, but cut from the edges of the big rolls coming out of the coating machines, as the middle bit of each roll is of more consistant quality, and sold as regular HP5 and FP4. I am speculating, of course, but the Kentmere films might be like the Pan400 and Pan100.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2009   #21
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
Simon Galley from Harmon/Ilford made this statement:


"KENTMERE film is absolutely BRAND new, 2 new emulsions, 35mm only, at a competitive price, it is not a 'rebadged' ILFORD Film, I think I have stated many times WE DO NOT SUPPLY PRIVATE LABEL even to a BRAND we own."
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2009   #22
Seele
Anachronistic modernist
 
Seele is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 300
But some of the Freestyle films were (at least) Ilford-sourced.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2009   #23
Al Kaplan
Registered User
 
Al Kaplan is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Age: 74
Posts: 4,478
Does anybody know anything about Photo Warehouse and their Ultrafine house branded films and papers?
__________________
RIP

My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2009   #24
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,478
ilford doesn't sell film to be rebranded. i am not sure why, despite ilford repeatedly stating so, that this seems to persist?

as far as i know the arista premium and ultra line are re-badged fuji and kodak.
__________________
www.johndensky.ca
@eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2009   #25
Seele
Anachronistic modernist
 
Seele is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 300
Note that the address on the box reads Cheshire, not in the Lakes District.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2009   #26
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
 
ItsReallyDarren's Avatar
 
ItsReallyDarren is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bay Area, Ca
Posts: 1,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Kaplan View Post
Does anybody know anything about Photo Warehouse and their Ultrafine house branded films and papers?
I've shot a fair amount of their films. Note that they switched to a new supplier and call the new films "Ultrafine Plus" with an emphasis on the plus. The previous films were widely believed to be rebadged Fomapan films. These new films have a little more mystery to their origin. Here or there you can hear people say its a film from China.

The 100 and 400 speed films are pretty decent. I've only developed them in Diafine at box speed and the images came out pretty good. They seem to be missing or don't have much of an anti-halation layer because they give highlights a spectacular glow. Midtones and shadows hold up pretty well but not grain. This film is not fine grain by any means, but in diafine the combo worked out nicely. Classic would be the word to describe its characteristics. Also means its not very good when you want a technically sharp modern looking film.

uf100
ultrafineplus100
ultrafineplus400


I have a few rolls left of the 100 and 400 bulk rolled somewhere. You can have them if your interested in trying them.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-09-2012   #27
slappyfin3
film enthusiast
 
slappyfin3 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 10
Hmm this thread seems to have died out. Im looking to buy 2 rolls of bulk film. One 400 and another 100 speed. For 100 I was thinking Kentmere since I've seen great results on Flickr and for 400 I was going to go HP5 plus but I know that film performance depends a lot on the developer I pair it with. I'm just going to use versions of Caffeinol/D76 but any developer recommendations would be most appreciated! I love the clean modern look @[email protected]
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-09-2012   #28
Rangefinderfreak
Registered User
 
Rangefinderfreak's Avatar
 
Rangefinderfreak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nowhere in sight
Posts: 640
I am shooting the 400 ISO version as Maco/rollei RPX-400 it IS a harmann/kentmere product. very similar to neopan 400 or other traditional acetate base films. It is a completely new emulsion, designed to be a european alternative to TRI-X you can see my images here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/4014628...7621929203790/

Please note my developer: HC-110/Rodinal mix 1:1 for one litre 15cc each, development time about 10minutes, depending of the wanted gamma/density; More for printing in enlarger, less for scanning.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-10-2012   #29
[email protected]
Registered User
 
raytoei@gmail.com's Avatar
 
[email protected] is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,005
jukka,

nice images. can you comment on this film vs your tri-x images ?

thanks
__________________
------------------------------------
Film is Photography.
------------------------------------
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-10-2012   #30
twhittle
Registered User
 
twhittle's Avatar
 
twhittle is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 106
For me I found it OK. I mean I thought that it could have more contrast, my negs came out a bit weak. Cooked them in HC-110 Dil. B for 5mins, so maybe they need longer.

Personally I found Fomapan 400 much much better, more contrast and much more of the grittiness that I get from HP5+.

Also fomapan is dirt cheap, and their sheet film is amazing!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-10-2012   #31
kdemas
ʎlʇuǝɹǝɟɟıp sƃuıɥʇ ǝǝS
 
kdemas's Avatar
 
kdemas is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,747
I haven't shot a ton with it yet but so far it's not bad. A nice point, it dries REALLY flat. Great for scanning.

__________________
------------------------------------------------------------
Open Iris. Life, Captured.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #32
Rangefinderfreak
Registered User
 
Rangefinderfreak's Avatar
 
Rangefinderfreak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nowhere in sight
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
jukka,

nice images. can you comment on this film vs your tri-x images ?

thanks
You know: TRI-X has changed many times, my 60`s tri-x look much smoother, maybe it is also developers. TRI-X with rodinal ( Ralph Gibson Style)= Is really rough. Tri-X with diafine is kind of "no punch". The films I use are TRI-X, Double X 5222 and Rollei RPX-400 Rollei is in between these two kodak products. As I don`t use Ilford, I cannot compare. I would say Kentmere/RPX 400 is "midle of the road" If you develop too much, it will be coarse. If you scan and keep to reasonable limits with density and contrast, the grain will be very nice... No TMax , but nice.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #33
Noserider
Registered User
 
Noserider is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 271
I did a test on Kentmere 100. The 400 seems a bit grainer to me than HP5 and Tri-x, close to Foma 400 and Efke. Not a bad film but not great, I'd recommend souping it in something more consistent than Caffenol at first to gain some understanding of what the tonal and grain qualities are. I've had nice looks with DK-50 and Xtol Replenished.

See the 100 test on silver prints at http://four-silver-atoms.com/2012/03...mere-100-test/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #34
Rangefinderfreak
Registered User
 
Rangefinderfreak's Avatar
 
Rangefinderfreak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nowhere in sight
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noserider View Post
I did a test on Kentmere 100. The 400 seems a bit grainer to me than HP5 and Tri-x, close to Foma 400 and Efke. Not a bad film but not great, I'd recommend souping it in something more consistent than Caffenol at first to gain some understanding of what the tonal and grain qualities are. I've had nice looks with DK-50 and Xtol Replenished.

See the 100 test on silver prints at http://four-silver-atoms.com/2012/03...mere-100-test/
You are referring to 100 iso film, I have 400 iso for compare

Last edited by Rangefinderfreak : 12-12-2012 at 00:43. Reason: misunderstanding
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2013   #35
[email protected]
Registered User
 
raytoei@gmail.com's Avatar
 
[email protected] is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,005
having bought a roll of kentmere,
i like the film:

+ works okay at 800 iso
+ flat when scanning
+ cheap to buy
- more grainy than Tri-X
- more development time to figure out as there aren't
too much info on massive chart website.



i shot in iso 200, 400 and 800 but didn't have the development
time for Ethol UFG, the above roll was developed at
around 10mins @ 30C in 1+2 Dilution. I think the 800 can develop
a bit longer. The 200 and 400 iso are good, the 800 is usable as well.
All of them have been brightness and contrast adjusted.

raytoei
__________________
------------------------------------
Film is Photography.
------------------------------------
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-08-2016   #36
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 1,947
Just wondering, three years on, whether anyone has had more recent experience of Kentmere 400?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-08-2016   #37
Fotohuis
Registered User
 
Fotohuis's Avatar
 
Fotohuis is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: the Netherlands, sometimes Ukraine
Posts: 1,779
I have found it too grainy. BTW the RPX-400 is NOT the same film. APX-400 (new) Lupus IS the same film like Kentmere 100 is equal to APX-100 (new) Lupus. The last film, APX-100 (new) I have tried out too. This ISO 100 film is almost the same comparing to RPX-100 and FP4+. if you can get it cheap it is a good alternative for Fomapan 100 too however the combi R09/Rodinal and FP100 E.I. 80 is better then Kentmere 100 and R09/Rodinal. For some (unknown) reason R09/Rodinal is not fitting well with Harman/Ilford products except maybe PAN F+.
__________________
"De enige beperking in je fotografie ben je zelf"



  Reply With Quote

Old 01-08-2016   #38
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 51
Posts: 4,844
I'm with HP5+ for now, because I need it @1600 and I'm not rich for TRI-X and T-MAX.
I went through few bulk rolls of Kentmere 400 with different developers prior and in between HP5+ and Foma 400 (the crappiest one).
Kentmere 400 isn't 400 film to me, but 200. At 200 it is good film for scanning. I have two bulks of it for bright time of the year.
I would rate Kentmere 400 based on 400 films I used so far in next order (top is the top):

TRI-X
TMAX
HP5+
Kentmere 400
...
...
....
Fomapan 400.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-08-2016   #39
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 1,947
Thanks for your opinions guys. It looks like it's not as good as HP5+, which is to be expected because it is cheaper...
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-08-2016   #40
joeswe
Registered User
 
joeswe is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 364
In my limited experience, it is grainier and grittier than HP5+. I like the look in Xtol 1+1. I use it either at box speed or push it two stops for night scenes, which results in a contrasty negatives, but I like the look.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:13.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.